DCAU Superman Problems

[Mistah K88]

Because it not only effectively buries Sinestro, but every Green Lantern/Superman/any superhero that fought him and had trouble. Let's say I came up to you, showed you that scene and said, "That's Sinestro. The greatest enemy of the Green Lantern Corps." What would your reaction be?

Or for another World's Finest example, the scene where Superman had his suit melted and was pretty much at the Joker's mercy. Not only did it make Supes look like an idiot (because he didn't just take the damn rock away from Joker when he had the chance) it made all of Superman's enemies look bad because they were so effortlessly one-upped.

And then there's Batman punching out Cheetah. The point is you have to be careful when having heroes fight another brand's hero/villain.

With the Joker vs Supes thing, it was merely Superman underestimating Joker. To him, this is some Gothamite clown aiming too high. If it was someone more in his league, I'm sure things would have gone differently.

But yeah, the Batarang scene with Sinestro made me laugh...they should have used a different villain...

[Judo Grip Batman]

I'm actually rewatching S:TAS right now, having recently done the same with B:TAS (JL/JLU may be next).

Superman's power levels are inconsistent, this is true, and a problem I think that will haunt the character no matter where he goes, since he's handled by so many different writers and artists (don't tell me his power levels are completely consistent within the comic books). It does stretch credibility at times. For example, how did the Superman who kept pace with the Flash as they raced in one episode have such a hard time with a robot spinning its core to face him up with the tied-up Mercy in World's Finest that Batman had to interfere.


But, like I said, it's not the show's biggest problem. What annoys me about S:TAS is that it seems to be written much more simplistically, way more blatantly meant strictly for children, like saaay lesser Disney movies or their rip-offs, whereas B:TAS seemed to be more sophisticated, sort of more like the average Pixar animated movie, able to enjoyed both by adults and children.

The conflicts in S:TAS frequently just amount to: 'how will he punch his way through this one?' The Metropolis setting is superficial, just a backdrop for the adventures to take place in. My brother, who is watching the cartoon with me, couldn't help but note the city finally came alive a little bit as soon as Batman was introduced in the World's Finest episodes, because you got to see him go to places like bars or nightclubs to stake out his prey...

And whereas I enjoy MOST of the characters and how they're depicted (Clancy Brown's Lex Luthor is particularly awesome), I think the DCAU Lois is just a little too much of a stand-offish snob. I know that's part of the character, but they seem to have dialled it up to 11 in this series. She's constantly slamming Clark. I guess World's Finest is what's freshest in my mind, since those are the latest episodes I watched...but, take that scene where she's about to be attacked by a robot in the Daily Planet building. A janitor asks 'where's Clark?' She replies with some derogatory farmboy comment. Why? I understand she likes making fun of him when he's around, but why does she need to say this when the dude's not even there? Plus, Batman arrives to rescue here right after the robot crashes...and he asks her if she's alone in the building. She says there's nobody else....Uh? Hello? What about the poor janitor you were speaking to three seconds ago?


Anyway...my complaints make it seem as if I hate the show, which is a little unfair. Some episodes stand out: anything with Brainiac, Metallo, Parasite or Darkseid; World's Finest itself is actually quite good; and, of course the sublime "The Late Mr. Kent." But the show, overall, does seem confused between wanting to be a slightly serious examination of the character and his mythos, as B:TAS was, or just wanting to entertain children.

[Mat001]

Because it not only effectively buries Sinestro, but every Green Lantern/Superman/any superhero that fought him and had trouble. Let's say I came up to you, showed you that scene and said, "That's Sinestro. The greatest enemy of the Green Lantern Corps." What would your reaction be?

It doesn't bury Sinestro. It just meant that Bruce got in a lucky shot.

Or for another World's Finest example, the scene where Superman had his suit melted and was pretty much at the Joker's mercy. Not only did it make Supes look like an idiot (because he didn't just take the damn rock away from Joker when he had the chance) it made all of Superman's enemies look bad because they were so effortlessly one-upped.

No, it just meant that Clark didn't know the Joker that well and didn't know that he had acid in his fake flower. That's why later when Bruce comes along to help, he says, "Expect the unexpected".

And then there's Batman punching out Cheetah. The point is you have to be careful when having heroes fight another brand's hero/villain.

Except that never really happens in the comics either.

[DochaDocha]

Protective suits was another problem the show had. It seemed like whenever Superman wore one, you knew the suit was going to be destroyed, and then we'd see him in pain later. I only watched roughly half the episodes, and I can think of 4 or 5 times his protective suit (of some sort) ended up getting destroyed. I was watching an episode with my brother once, and Supes showed up with a suit on, and I said to him, "I bet that thing gets destroyed." We started laughing after it did. From a viewer's perspective, it's like Superman was the exact opposite of all those clever secret agents and heroes who'd come with protective gear, but not reveal it until the end, and we'd all think, "Man, that was genius!" Instead, he shows up with his suit on, it gets destroyed, and you start thinking he should've come up with a smarter plan.

[Francisco]

It doesn't bury Sinestro. It just meant that Bruce got in a lucky shot.



No, it just meant that Clark didn't know the Joker that well and didn't know that he had acid in his fake flower. That's why later when Bruce comes along to help, he says, "Expect the unexpected".



Except that never really happens in the comics either.

Batman was always geting those lucky shots in. He was always giving advice. And Superman always getting depowered and dumbed down so Batman could look good.
It was not an exception it was the rule.

[Burning Eyes]

My single biggest problem with S:TAS was when Sinestro showed up.
He imprisons Superman with a Yellow Power Ring Construct, and it takes Superman almost the rest of the episode to break free.
I realize they wanted to showcase Kyle Rayner, but it was still frustrating.

By contrast, in the old Challenge of the Superfriends, Superman once squared off agianst Sinestro, and effortlessly floored him.
Even better, Sinestro knew going into it that there was no chance he could succeed against the Man of Steel, and therefore incorporated his inevitable defeat at Superman's hands into his very own Master Plan.

[DiceRoll]

With the Joker vs Supes thing, it was merely Superman underestimating Joker. To him, this is some Gothamite clown aiming too high. If it was someone more in his league, I'm sure things would have gone differently.

Considering Joker had him on the ground dying I'd say he's pretty much in his league.
Also when you consider that Supes has faced people like Toy-Man and should know better by now...yeah I still say he looks dumb.

It doesn't bury Sinestro. It just meant that Bruce got in a lucky shot.

If that's how you see it, fair enough. To many others who saw this scene, he was buried. Deep.

No, it just meant that Clark didn't know the Joker that well and didn't know that he had acid in his fake flower. That's why later when Bruce comes along to help, he says, "Expect the unexpected".

And even then he still underestimated him and got punked by the Joker (remember the exploding marbles next scene), again, idiot. Where as when Bats had to take on Luthor, he didn't even break a sweat. Supes and Lex underestimated their opponents and ended up looking like morons when they came out on top and the fact that had no chance to redeem themselves for it only serves to further drag down their image.

Except that never really happens in the comics either.

Sure about that?

[Mat001]

Protective suits was another problem the show had. It seemed like whenever Superman wore one, you knew the suit was going to be destroyed, and then we'd see him in pain later. I only watched roughly half the episodes, and I can think of 4 or 5 times his protective suit (of some sort) ended up getting destroyed. I was watching an episode with my brother once, and Supes showed up with a suit on, and I said to him, "I bet that thing gets destroyed." We started laughing after it did. From a viewer's perspective, it's like Superman was the exact opposite of all those clever secret agents and heroes who'd come with protective gear, but not reveal it until the end, and we'd all think, "Man, that was genius!" Instead, he shows up with his suit on, it gets destroyed, and you start thinking he should've come up with a smarter plan.

But then people would mock Superman for not having one.

Batman was always geting those lucky shots in. He was always giving advice. And Superman always getting depowered and dumbed down so Batman could look good.
It was not an exception it was the rule.

Superman was never a genius in his own show. They were following the Post Crisis standard. As to advice from Batman, given that he was the longest active hero, it isn't surprising. He's been doing it for since his twenties. They've been doing it for far less. It'd be no different if it was Alan Scott and Jay Garrick.

Also when you consider that Supes has faced people like Toy-Man and should know better by now...yeah I still say he looks dumb

Toyman didn't employ Kryptonite in Clark's first encounter with him. Clark knew that the Joker had the Kryptonite dragon, which is why he had the lead suit. And not knowing about the Joker is common in all comic book encounters. Hell, that was the purpose of Marvel's "Acts Of Vengeance".

And even then he still underestimated him and got punked by the Joker (remember the exploding marbles next scene), again, idiot.

Bruce didn't give his warning to Clark until after the first encounter. When the exploding marbles scene happened, Bruce reminded him again about how unpredictable the Joker was. That doesn't make Clark an idiot.

Where as when Bats had to take on Luthor, he didn't even break a sweat.

Bruce had dealt with men like Lex before, thanks to Rupert Thorne and Roland Daggett.

Supes and Lex underestimated their opponents and ended up looking like morons when they came out on top and the fact that had no chance to redeem themselves for it only serves to further drag down their image.

How does that demean Lex? Again, he's had no experience with the Joker. Which is far different from when they meet again in "Injustice For All".

Sure about that?

No, that wasn't what I was referring to. I was referring to the notion that writers have to be careful when dealing with other heroes or villains. Writers in those crossovers aren't "careful" as you put it. For instance, Mr. Freeze was able to give Kyle Rayner a hard time during "Underworld Unleashed", but then cannot beat Batman a short while later. Or the Flash has trouble with Captain Boomerang, but Superman deals with him pretty handily. Or Firestorm falling before members of the Injustice League.

[DochaDocha]

But then people would mock Superman for not having one.

I wasn't arguing that Superman shouldn't wear a suit, I was arguing that if he's going to come to the scene with a suit, he should have a better game plan so that the suit doesn't get ripped off him, torn off, burnt off, etc. That the show was predictable whenever he wore one was my beef.

[Francisco]

Superman was never a genius in his own show. They were following the Post Crisis standard. As to advice from Batman, given that he was the longest active hero, it isn't surprising. He's been doing it for since his twenties. They've been doing it for far less. It'd be no different if it was Alan Scott and Jay Garrick.

You're wrong Post Crisis Superman wasn't a scientific mind but he was defintely smart and was portrayed as such during the first and second meeting with Batman. The one when they fought Magpie and Dark Knight over Metropolis. Both characters had their chance to shine. In the other hand Bruce Timm and Co. did all in their power to make Superman look inferior to Batman. It had nothing to do with Batman being active longer and a lot to do with Timm's undaying batfanboyism.

[Francisco]

One of Bruce Timm's greatest success is to have fanboys referring to the Justice League as Batman and his super powered bitches. He did that single handy.

[Mat001]

You're wrong Post Crisis Superman wasn't a scientific mind but he was defintely smart and was portrayed as such during the first and second meeting with Batman. The one when they fought Magpie and Dark Knight over Metropolis. Both characters had their chance to shine.

Except Batman was the one to figure out who Magpie was and Batman outsmarted Superman with the explosive.

In the other hand Bruce Timm and Co. did all in their power to make Superman look inferior to Batman. It had nothing to do with Batman being active longer and a lot to do with Timm's undaying batfanboyism.

Except in "Knight Time", it was Superman who figured out what happened to Bruce and was able to take down four of his rogues. And then rescue him from Brainiac. Then Clark had to rescue Bruce in "The Demon Reborn".

[Francisco]

Except Batman was the one to figure out who Magpie was and Batman outsmarted Superman with the explosive.



Except in "Knight Time", it was Superman who figured out what happened to Bruce and was able to take down four of his rogues. And then rescue him from Brainiac. Then Clark had to rescue Bruce in "The Demon Reborn".

Magpie was Batman's rogue. Superman went to Gotham in pursuit of Batman unitl he realized Batman was a hero not a foe. Yes Batman outsmarted with the explosive but it didn't make Superman look like a fool but like someone who values human life.

Knight Time was great and worked because they had an actual powerful villain taking out the Batman. The Demon Reborn had Superman captured by Thalia Ghull of all people in the most stupidest way posible. Batman's villains aren't good enough to hang with Superman. Ra's al Ghull just like Bane is an street level villain.

[DiceRoll]

Superman was never a genius in his own show. They were following the Post Crisis standard. As to advice from Batman, given that he was the longest active hero, it isn't surprising. He's been doing it for since his twenties. They've been doing it for far less. It'd be no different if it was Alan Scott and Jay Garrick.

There's a difference between not being a genius and being...whatever you'd call DCAU Supes. Then again he showed glimpses of intelligence during S:TAS. Y'know...when Batman wasn't around.

Toyman didn't employ Kryptonite in Clark's first encounter with him. Clark knew that the Joker had the Kryptonite dragon, which is why he had the lead suit. And not knowing about the Joker is common in all comic book encounters. Hell, that was the purpose of Marvel's "Acts Of Vengeance".

The Joker? How'd that work?

Bruce didn't give his warning to Clark until after the first encounter. When the exploding marbles scene happened, Bruce reminded him again about how unpredictable the Joker was. That doesn't make Clark an idiot.

Considering that he had to be reminded right after he was nearly killed, the fact that he saw Joker throw the marbles and actually stepped on them most certainly does.

Also, Joker is not that unpredictable, I saw that coming, my brother saw it coming, anyone with have a brain saw that coming.

Bruce had dealt with men like Lex before, thanks to Rupert Thorne and Roland Daggett.

Funny how only Bruce's experience counts for something.

How does that demean Lex? Again, he's had no experience with the Joker. Which is far different from when they meet again in "Injustice For All".

Wasn't that when Joker showed up, said "Hey, Batman put a tracer on you," and rightfully said that they should've killed Bats when they had the chance (especially since he essentially saved himself, the League just supplied the fight scene).

Really the only difference was that Lex decided not to try and punk Joker. So, yeah I guess he learned something.

No, that wasn't what I was referring to. I was referring to the notion that writers have to be careful when dealing with other heroes or villains. Writers in those crossovers aren't "careful" as you put it.

Actually I said they should be, not that they are.

For instance, Mr. Freeze was able to give Kyle Rayner a hard time during "Underworld Unleashed", but then cannot beat Batman a short while later. Or the Flash has trouble with Captain Boomerang, but Superman deals with him pretty handily. Or Firestorm falling before members of the Injustice League.

And stuff like this is why.

Except in "Knight Time", it was Superman who figured out what happened to Bruce and was able to take down four of his rogues. And then rescue him from Brainiac.

1) When the plot of an episode is "Where's Bruce Wayne?" obviously we're not gonna have Bruce Wayne solve the mystery.
2) The fact that you can type Superman beating Bane, the Riddler and the Mad Hatter like it's a noteworthy achievement with a straight face worries me.

Then Clark had to rescue Bruce in "The Demon Reborn".

Which one was that?

[DochaDocha]

The biggest flaw in "Knight Time," as I think I mentioned earlier, was that Robin met Superman and didn't give a F. A Robin who is that emotionless and joyless upon meeting Superman for the first time is hardly a Robin at all, IMHO.

But I still think that's a good episode.